Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Steve Lokness who wrote (152189)	12/21/2005 4:44:03 PM
From: DMaA	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 793559

What changed? So why change what is allowed under the Constitution on 9/11?

To: Steve Lokness who wrote (152189)	12/21/2005 4:46:39 PM
From: longnshort	Respond to of 793559

What has changed. Carter signed that in 1978. How many people have fallen under the Patriot Act??? ask a lawyer. Now how many people have fallen under liberal, city,state and county laws??????? millions. Can even own a business without libs taking away your rights. Can't drive a car with out libs taking away your rights.

To: Steve Lokness who wrote (152189)	12/21/2005 5:25:33 PM
From: Alan Smithee	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 793559

So why change what is allowed under the Constitution on 9/11? Steve, you keep making the point (your opinion, I'd note) that the wiretaps are unconstitutional. What's your authority for this? And, how do you respond to the following article? Message 21994107 The author (who is a former Associate Attorney General from the Clinton administration) concludes: But we cannot eliminate the need for extraordinary action in the kind of unforeseen circumstances presented by Sept.11. I do not believe the Constitution allows Congress to take away from the president the inherent authority to act in response to a foreign attack. That inherent power is reason to be careful about who we elect as president, but it is authority we have needed in the past and, in the light of history, could well need again.

To: Steve Lokness who wrote (152189)	12/22/2005 2:42:01 PM
From: The Philosopher	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793559

Of course they existed! So why change what is allowed under the Constitution on 9/11? What are you claiming changed on 9/11? The power to wiretap US-to-foreign-nation calls without warrant existed before 9/11. Previous Presidents, including Democratic ones, had used that power. That didn't change after 9/11. There were pre 9/11 court decisions explicitly saying these wiretaps were legal. Exactly what aspects of what's allowed under the Constitution do you claim changed on 9/11? Please be explicit and give references.